Swami Vivekananda and Malcolm X

Tupac

Africa and India share much more than what you have identified. We also agree that Africans need justice and better economic conditions.

We disagree over the effectiveness of Malcolm X and his chosen paths in delivering anything good in the long-term, whether it is economic prosperity or religious peace and justice.

Let`s get busy working for Africa`s benefit. It will be very racist of us indeed to insist on first resolving our won Malcolm X differences before we extend our African cousins the hand of our friendship and cooperation.

---

Malcolm X was black. Yet the debate about the wisdom of his ways is neither about nor limited to Africa. It is part of a larger debate finally and rightly intensifying on the global scale. The debate which is deeply questioning the formerly unquestioned, easily-made, and blindly repeated claims about the divine and social claims of some people. The debate about which human ways are right and which ones are wrong and even harmful.

................................................

There is a strong common thread of Asiatic religious spirituality running through Shinto, Confucianism, Naga religion, Tamil Saivism, Buddhism and the religion of the Irulas of the Nilgiris.

Re: # 20

Kaalchakra, I`m not suggesting that S. Asians and Africans connect *only* through Malcolm X. I see the connection as being one of people who have both experienced their lands being turned into a warren for raw materials for capitalist expansion, with the collaboration of local elites. In the case of Africa, it was far more tragic because human beings were trafficked. As for
``In the Asiatic view, the needs, wants, desires, or objectives are not sufficient to define the main or the core human being. They describe our jad - our physical or animal level. That is not the chief realm of our religions.``

Many would disagree with such an overarching conclusion. I don`t think there`s some monolithic ``Asiatic view`` - do you? How are Shinto, Confucianism, Islam, Naga religion, Tamil Saivism, Christianity, Manu, Buddhism and the religion of the Irulas of the Nilgiris intrinsically similar in some primordial ``Asiatic`` way??

I should amend what I originally said. I think Dalits and other oppressed peoples in S. Asia understand full well what connects them with Africa - not something primordial but the experience of a particular kind of oppression that cannot be tolerated by simply elevating one`s mind to ethereal realms. Even Buddha said that starved and mortified bodies cannot in any way lead to spiritual growth. So the struggle for justice - economic and social justice can be seen as a spiritual and moral one rather than being an ``animal`` need as you put it. And I don`t think Bin Laden and Malcolm X are any more similar intrinsically than Malcolm X and Vivekananda. Which connection do you choose to make, is the question. Malcolm X was not a secret cultic figure - he openly wrote, spoke and organized. Not in favour of some wishy washy ethereal stuff but for real issues of justice that struck right at the heart of an exploitative system. He doesn`t amaze me as an ``oddity`` - as you put it in that latently racist way - but because I am totally with his view of human emancipation, and the outrage against injustice that it should call forth in every moral person.

Tupak

We need to separate the identity of Africa from that of Malcolm X.

India and Africa are sister civilizations. We must give Africa more support and greater affection. We should reconnect with its poeples, and make new connections where we did not have them before.

Malcolm X is a completely different issue. Supporting, not supporting, or opposing him, is a moral-ethical question. People will see him very differently, depending on their own moral-ethical roots and traditions.

(Half seriously, we can safely ignore the lunatic fringe among white liberals - morality requires a sense of reality).

..............

For most followers of Asiatic religions, people raised with an oriental moral sensitivity, it would be hard to mistake a Malcolm X for a Vivekananda. Similarly, not many Asians beyond teen age years (when every person of the opposite sex is a god or a goddess) would confuse a Bin Laden for a Mohandas Gandhi.

We see too many differences, and too few commonalities, other than they are all human beings and want very human things.

In the Asiatic view, the needs, wants, desires, or objectives are not sufficient to define the main or the core human being. They describe our jad - our physical or animal level. That is not the chief realm of our religions.

Because we see them as sharing the same physical and animal tendencies as us, Malcolm X and Bin Laden may win our curiosities. They may even amaze some of us as part of the world`s great oddities. But they don`t rise high enough for us spiritually to win our respect in a moral/ religious, role-model sense.

---

Tupak, for the well-wishers of Africa and India, it`s not wise to insist that India and Africa connect only throuogh Malcolm X or his paths. It`s time to return to our own very native connections so we can move ahead jointly, without being dragged down by the baggage of Malcolm X.

Re: # 9

Kaalchakra, while I concur with you on the Indian-Africa connections, I`m not sure why you`re so horrified by the Malcolm-Vivekananda equation. As far as equations go - they can all be scorned on some level or another but I prefer to look at the intention and effect. A connection between S. Asians and Africans is one we should make if we`re at at concerned about justice on a global scale. Making that connection enabled many movements for emancipation on both continents and in America. Why scorn it if the motive is good??

Ok bjkumar, I accept your apology. I have to say things strongly sometimes so people will understand what they didn`t understand before. Its all about sharing perspectives right? :-).

I too have read this stuff a few times over. Each reading has strengthened my initial, extremely poor opinion. Each pass has revealed more unacceptable weaknesses in whatever passes for arguments here.

I am now far less uncertain about the suspected influence of intellectual dishonesty or stupidty or both. But it`s an author`s privilege to make any kind of arguments (s)he feels inspired to make.

Tupac - Also, just to make sure I did not leave any parts of it unaddressed, ALL the words in the second part of that (culprit) paragraph (which you identified below) are from that web site. In other words - I should have put all of the base activities listed there within quotes. Indeed, those are not really words I thought of or would have been able to think of. However, without the quotations, it might indeed appear that way and produce the reaction that it did in you. Hope this would help clarify things a little more.

Since my last two posts on this item, I have gone back and read (and reread) this article a few more times. In honesty, I must now admit that there is more to the comparison between these two great individuals than I realized at my first quick reading and I did the author grave justice the first two times around.

Therefore, first of all, I make an unqualified apology to the author for using the term “intellectual dishonesty”. That was a grossly wrong term in this case and also very cruel (insensitive). This article obviously took a lot of leg work and careful weighing of words in how it was drafted. This work is very eminently honest and thoughtful, without a doubt!

Tupac, I am really sorry that I hurt your feelings in any way. Please believe me, racism was the last thing from my mind, just the comparison of what appeared to be “stark differences” in the deeds of these two individuals, which prompted my initial (knee-jerk) reaction. I was not even thinking of Malcolm-X as the leader of “blacks”, per say. (When I think of individuals in that way, I normally think of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., or more recently, although at a lower rating, perhaps Jesse Jackson.) I do realize that there is a lot of substance in what you say and indeed one must take into account the times, the society, and the prevailing economic conditions - even in evaluating what appears to be written record. After all, these documents were put together by men, not God. (Also, as someone who has been in the U.S. for quite a while, I fully understand the conditions that you describe. Please believe me, those who have been at the receiving end of racism themselves rank that act only a notch below infanticide and will never indulge in it themselves, at least not consciously.)

Therefore, Tupac, once again, SORRY, man! PLEASE stop pouting now! Now can we go have a beer together, one of these days?!

Re: # 11
``The Swami led a clean life. Malcolm X was found ``mentally disqualified for military service`` because of psychopathic personality inadequacies, sexual perversion, and psychiatric rejection. He followed that act later by pushing dope, playing the numbers, peddling bootleg whiskey, and hustling.``

That`s the bit I find racist. The ``clean`` vs. ``unclean`` distinction has such a troubled and icky history in racism wiorldwide. What is ``sexual perversion`` anyway?? That whole quote from you is such a concentrated mix of racist stereotypes. What is ``psychiatric rejection``?? A shrink refused to see him? What are ``psychopathic personality inadequacies``?? As for pushing dope, playing numbers, hustling etc - are you aware that when Malcolm X wrote, and even today, being poor and black in the US (and UK) seriously restricts your access to legal job opportunities? Further, being rich and white allows you to get away with all manner of crimes. Vivekananda came from a cushy bourgeois family and the ``traditions`` he pushed were elite Brahminical traditions that the vast majority of people classified as Hindu in India today do not know about or care about. Vivekananda wasn`t pushing local traditions, please keep in mind. He was an elitist. I find Malcolm X more amazing because coming from the background he did, and the crushing limitations society imposed on him, he managed to mobilize a mass movement and strike fear into the hearts of racists. And he only advocated violence in self defense - at a time when black people could be lynched for no reason at all. If you were in fear of being cut into little pieces just coz some white woman imagined you looked at her, you`d advocate violence in self defense too.

I always though Malcolm X was more similar to ghandi then martin was.

And author do not expect chowkies to understand your work, the Majority of people here are brainwashed.

re: bjkumar # 11

``author is committing intellectual dishonesty``

The author could be honest to the best of his ability. We will know which it is, when the author hopefully returns to fill us in.

Reply to #8, Tupac
[The responses from bjkumar and urstruly convince me of one thing. Whether Hindu or Muslim, Indian or Pakistani, racism against African people is alive and well among South Asians. Why such contempt and disrespect for Malcolm X?]

Tupac, you got it all wrong. First of all, I don’t know about urstruly, but if you are upset about what I wrote about Malcolm X in #5, item no. (2), I did not make that up – those things really happened – check the link entitled brothermalcolm.net, which was the source for that information. Since the purpose of the original article was to compare those two individuals, the author is committing intellectual dishonesty by whitewashing such starkly obvious differences under the euphemism “turbulence”. That is why it was necessary to bring it up! (From the way you phrase it, it appears that if any one said anything against Malcolm X, no matter how well established the facts, you would consider them racists. It is not possible to argue logically if you use that mindset. By doing so, your case does not become stronger, only your objectivity becomes a casualty.)

I am looking very hard in my response for any traces of “racism”. I am sorry, it is just not there, so I can not find it. Perhaps, in this case, the racism lies “in the eye of the beholder”. Or, like they say “Patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels”, maybe its corollary here would be that allegations of racism are the last refuge of those who can not come up with an intellectual counter argument.

Re: # 8
Tupac,
I think you make mistake when you think that south asians have a `horror` of associating Swami Vivekananda with Malcolm X, because he is black. I see no such revulsion when comparisons are made between Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. I believe the revulsioin comes from Malcolm`s espousal of violent means, and not the color of his skin.

Tupac

India and Africa are more similar - socially, spiritually, historically - than the European-Arab dominated worldview may lead one to conclude. Indians and Africans have also had a long tradition of admiring each others` greats since long before and much after Malcolm X.

Hi Teju, Nice piece and well-intentioned. The responses from bjkumar and urstruly convince me of one thing. Whether Hindu or Muslim, Indian or Pakistani, racism against African people is alive and well among South Asians. Why such contempt and disrespect for Malcolm X? Who is the guardian of ``true`` Islam?? I think Malcolm had too rosy a picture of Muslims in general not caring about race. The role of Arab Muslims in the African slave trade cannot be ignored. And the color prejudices of Pakistanis are well known. I mean, its common to talk about the ``Hindu`` caste system but people forget that color bigotry crosses all religious lines. I see it in the ``horror`` that someone may have equated Vivekananda and Malcolm X. Why not? I think Malcolm X was a far more amazing human being, actually.

Teju

``The Nation of Islam (founded by Elijah Muhammad) was just that force, because it operated as more than just a religion. The nation presented itself as a path to political, cultural and social liberation, and that’s how it fused itself into Malcolm’s ethos. As a religion, it followed Muslim rules according to the Koran, but as a social movement it provided a sense of freedom and identity. ``

One clarification here that the cult that calls itself The Nation of Islam has no connection with Islam whatsoever except that its name contains the word Islam and some of its members bear Arabic names. As far as beliefs are concerned, it is just a hodge podge of biblical beliefs and Roman mythology. It has nothing to with Quranic teachings. In its essence it is a new religion originated by Elijah Mohammad. Malcolm X or Malik Shahbaz was originally a member of this cult but he was later influenced by Wallace Mohammad who was the true Muslim. Malcolm converted and performed Hajj and renounced its affiliation with this racist cult called Church of Nation of Islam. That was one of the main causes of his assassination.